EDITORIAL: The decision by the National Assembly’s Standing Committee on the Cabinet Secretariat to overwhelmingly endorse a bill barring bureaucrats from holding dual nationality has reignited an important debate about loyalty, integrity, and fairness within state institutions.
Moved by JUI-F’s Noor Alam Khan, the bill seeks to amend Section 5 of the Civil Servants Act, 1973, to explicitly disqualify individuals with dual nationality or foreign citizenship from appointment as civil servants. At its core, the proposal raises a fundamental question: what standard of allegiance should the state reasonably expect from those entrusted with public authority?
The mover of the bill argued that since parliamentarians and members of the armed forces are prohibited from holding dual citizenship, civil servants should be subject to the same restriction. While this appeal to uniformity may sound persuasive, framing the issue purely in terms of equivalence is misplaced. The real concern is not whether bureaucrats are treated the same as legislators, but whether their exclusive loyalty to Pakistan can be ensured. Civil servants occupy powerful positions in policymaking, administration, and implementation; any perceived conflict of interest therefore risks undermining public trust in the system.
READ MORE: Bold move: NA panel hints at forcing bureaucrats to relinquish dual nationalities
That said, blanket bans often produce their own injustices. Cabinet Secretary Kamran Ali Afzal’s suggestion that cases of bureaucrats holding dual citizenship by birth be reviewed merits consideration. Many individuals acquire foreign nationality not by choice but due to circumstances such as birth abroad, parental status, or legal technicalities. At the point of entry into public service, allegiance cannot realistically be pre-judged in the absence of a service record. The more reasonable approach, therefore, is not to presume divided loyalty at the outset, but to enforce exclusivity of allegiance through clearly defined conditions of service, rigorously applied throughout tenure.
A significant aspect of the discussion was the Cabinet Secretary’s suggestion that judges also be brought within the ambit of the proposed law. If the principle underpinning the bill is the protection of state integrity and public confidence, excluding the judiciary would be inconsistent. Judges, like senior bureaucrats, wield enormous influence over the lives of citizens, and exercise even greater sway over governance through constitutional interpretation. The debate, nonetheless, must move beyond simplistic comparisons. Ensuring loyalty to Pakistan is a legitimate state interest, but it must be pursued through carefully calibrated laws that balance national security, justice, and institutional effectiveness.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2026
Comments